Pirate Party Invited To, Then Banned From Gaming Exhibition 115
esocid writes with this excerpt from TorrentFreak:
"Despite having booked and paid for their booth at Gamex, Sweden's largest gaming exhibition, the Pirate Party have been excluded from the action this week. The party, who say they were nagged for 2 to 3 months to book for the event, were this week informed they were too controversial and no longer welcome. ... [Pirate Party leader Anna Troberg] says that after the sales people from the exhibition pursued the party for months to participate, they decided to book and pay for a booth. ... 'I thought it was a bit strange, but in the afternoon, the pieces fell into place when the fair manager, Bear Wengse, phoned me and kindly, but firmly, announced that the Pirate Party was no longer welcome at the fair.' Wengse informed Troberg that the exhibition is a meeting place and not a venue for political conflict and the party's presence could cause problems, particularly since some of their work "could be perceived as criminal."'"
Obviously. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
To belittle them?
Re:Obviously. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
And we have a winner, I never met a salesman(or woman) that wouldn't give up their first born for a sale...
and that's being polite...
Re: (Score:2)
You haven't met that many salesmen then...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Obviously. (Score:4, Informative)
Because sales guy wanted his commission and when the higher ups figured out who the booth had been sold to, they cancelled it.
The funny thing, though, is that the Pirate Party's name features prominently on Gamex' advertising in papers and in the subways. Did the advertising get approved without even a cursory examination by the bosses (or any other responsible person within the company)? And nobody discovered the mistake until a few days before the convention opened?
Re: (Score:2)
So their name was used on advertising, but they still had to pay for a booth and now they can't even attend? Wow. Time for a lawsuit to have their name removed, and for attendees to complain about false advertising.
Okay, the Swedes aren't very litigious (being Vikings they tend to settle disputes with their axe :) ) but still.. this sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume the Pirate Party got their fee back - I'm sure they'd have pointed it out if they didn't. They just lost some work and planning.
Still, I think the attention they got in the press is more than worth it. This makes the Pirate Party look like a more serious contender, and the anti-pirates look like jerks.
Re:Obviously. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Obviously. (Score:5, Informative)
No, the Pirate Party did not win any seats in the Swedish parliament. They have two seats in the European parliament, however.
Re:Obviously. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
The SSU (Swedish Social Democratic Youth League) are still allowed to attend the event, and they support the decriminalization of non-commercial file sharing, so I don't buy the political exclusion claim.
This is the reason it's a story IMO. If they don't want political organizations there, that's fine. Allowing some political groups and not others is not so kosher. Of course it's a private event so they decide, but it makes it newsworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/08/pirate_party_european_parliament/ [theregister.co.uk]
Doesn't have to be Sweden, the movement is gaining a foothold.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a bit of a silly thing to reply to a post that shows them getting traction elsewhere by winning seats in other parliaments.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
by Synerg1y (2,169,962)
why are you on slashdot again?
calling people faggot?
go back to reddit.
Re: (Score:2)
The grandparent was probably thinking of the two seats the Swedish Pirate Party won in the EU Parliament.
Re:Obviously. (Score:4, Interesting)
The point is: why would they even try to invite them? It isn't like three months ago the public opinion of something named "PIRATE PARTY" would be any diferent.
The point is, even if they were banned, why would they not show up and occupy a booth anyway? I see much opportunity for hilarity here :-D
Re: (Score:3)
The Pirate Party did show up outside the convention and handed out t-shirts. They also paid the entry fee for the 20 first people who went in with their t-shirt on.
Re: (Score:3)
The point is: why would they even try to invite them? It isn't like three months ago the public opinion of something named "PIRATE PARTY" would be any diferent.
The scuttlebutt is that they thought the Ninja Party would be there, too, but declined. All fell apart after that.
Re: (Score:1)
Refund? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Refund? (Score:5, Interesting)
Even with a refund of the booth fee, the Pirate Party could still be out a significant chunk of change.
Exhibition-grade booth displays and paraphernalia cost thousands of dollars (even tens of thousands for large booths), and if the Pirate Party invested money on materials specifically for this show, they may have just flushed a significant portion of their yearly budget.
The paranoid might even think that this invite-then-ban manuever was done deliberately.
Re:Refund? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, the Pirate party will not have to pay to attend since they got banned even though they was on the billboards in the subway on the events ads.
No, they had not had any big expenses from this.
Pirate Party youth section was there and gave away their t-shirts outside the doors, The ban meant alot of goodwill for the Pirate party and some good press.
So all in all this made the pirate party the talk of the event and got some good press.
Kinda strange that getting banned gave the pirate party more positive attention then attending the event would have.
Re: (Score:1)
If this assumption is true (that they spent a significant portion of their annual budget), then one of both of two things is true: 1) they're idiots for overspending, and 2) they're idiots for not have a reasonable operating budget.
Re: (Score:3)
Exhibition-grade booth displays and paraphernalia cost thousands of dollars
Are booth babes really that expensive? :)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the size, you get what you pay for even in the both babe field.
Nice Freudian slip of the tongue there, mate :)
Re: (Score:1)
sorry, hands are otherwise occupied...
Translation: "The developers when apeshit" (Score:4, Funny)
Seriously, what trade show thought they would get away with a move that would piss off 90% of their exhibitors?
Re:Translation: "The developers when apeshit" (Score:4, Insightful)
A tradeshow that wanted to appeal to 99% of the exhibitors customers? Or wait, make that 100%.
Re: (Score:2)
How so? Very few are neutral to the Pirate Party, so if half are happy to go talk to them and half are happy to go heckle them, then 100% enjoyed their presence.
Re: (Score:1)
correct... you instead become free marketing. telling all of your less tech savvy friends how good the game is so they go out and buy it.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually it is not. i have done it multiple times, and made gaming companies around ~$10,000 from pirating games and telling friends about them. so they lose my copies...in total in the games i have touted that would have amounted to ~$500.....that's quite a large profit.
Re: (Score:1)
when they STOP using DRM, i will stop pirating...i am one of those lucky fellas that had my cd rom FUCKED by starforce drm.
Re: (Score:2)
DRM does help sales, to a point. I would counter that overdoing the DRM is the major issue.
If the DRM stops casual piracy (ie. the selling of $2 DVD's on street corners) while not being completely bullet proof (such that a moderately technical user can circumvent) that is the golden area. From here, a significant number of people are able to bypass but not the majority due to hassle, virus fears, or lack of know how / fear of tinkering with a computer. It balances mass piracy against privacy intrusion an
Re: (Score:2)
I buy original games, then download the crack so I can play them under Linux or on my CD-less netbook (this is legal where I live).
I also download games illegally, but on average, I think I spend the same amount of money on games as I would have if illegal downloading wasn't an option. I almost only download games to try them out; almost all my gaming time is spent on the games I bought legally.
One of the few pirated games I played for an extended period was Fable: The Lost Chapters for the XBox. I ended up
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on now. That's like a car thief telling the dealership they should be okay with him stealing the car because all his buddies will see how cool he looks in it and go out and buy their own.
Re: (Score:2)
Users aren't customers. If you're downloading someone's software without paying them for it, you are not their customer.
The users are, however, consumers. If you have a significant number of consumers who aren't customers, surely a more sensible approach is to investigate why this is the case and try to convert them, rather than simply dismissing them as irrelevant?
Plus, at least as far as music goes (and by extrapolation to games and software), there is a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest that "pirates" actually spend more [independent.co.uk] on average than non-pirates, so are these groups' best customers.
Re: (Score:2)
Publishers, not developers.
Simple explanation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Best comment of the thread. Everyone else can stop posting now :)
Hm... (Score:2)
they decided to book and pay for a booth
I don't see the article mentioning a refund, I'm hoping this wasn't just a huge ploy from the start to take their money.
Booths at these kinds of things usually aren't cheap...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FYI - I know this is in Europe
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Poorly edited summary (Score:4, Insightful)
> they decided to book and pay for a booth. ... 'I thought it was a bit strange, but in the afternoon, the pieces fell into place
This is an example of either poor clipping, or intentionally inflammatory clipping. From having RTFA, the pirate party had called to get answers on a couple of practical issues, and the person they talked to sounded vague and extremely stressed out. THAT is what Troberg, as quoted in the actual article, thought strange.
seriously obvious and expected, from the beginning (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sure the organizers never wanted the pirate party there at all. But inviting them was a brilliant business move. For a whole host of reasons, from inflaming other exhibitors, getting those other exhibitors to spend more, encouraging another segment to exhibit, and impressing sponsors in the first place. Then, finally, supporting those that wanted the pirate party gone.
I'll bet it was the best period of business activity for the organizers. Welcome to playing one side against the other, and getting news-level advertising fory our show in the process.
Why is any of this surprising to anyone? It's just a gossip-tree and a rumour-mill at the business level.
Ooh, guess who's coming to dinner. Oh, sorry, they cancelled at the last minute.
Re: (Score:2)
You can make just about anything obvious if you decide to cherry-pick out the inconvenient possibilities. Consider this similar line of reasoning:
"What a stupid move by the organisers! Inviting the pirate party was always going to piss the exhibitors off. It would just attract the file-sharing crowd and make the event hostile towards big game studios. Basically, by inviting the pirate party, they would have jeopardised the exhibitors' contributing to this and all subsequent events, and irreparably damaged a
Re: (Score:2)
considering someone else's intentional choices as undesirable or stupid on their part is almost always incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
For an individual making some kind of personal choice, maybe. For a group/committee/government, or anyone trying to organise an event, not even close. I have both organised events and been part of committees in the past (often at the same time), and making stupid decisions, or failing to correctly predict something important, is not just difficult to avoid, it's part and parcel to the job.
I think what most likely happened was that whatever committee is responsible decided to send out invitations to various
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good point. I agree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. I think you just made my day.
Re: (Score:2)
(: hey, it's a good argument, that you made, with organizations having corrective elements as a part of the job. I was thinking of the show organizers as an individual -- being an entrepreneur, I do that sometimes.
Wrong name (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Another (less common) name in Norway is "Roar". Go figure.
Gaming Fair? (Score:2)
More like Gaming "Unfair", amirite folks?
Hey, won't you please come to our convention? (Score:2)
SYKE! HAHA!
Brings a new meaning to "con".
Auto-transalated! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Google Translate strikes again! :)
Webservers were DDoSed by Anonymous (Score:2)
I can't help it (Score:2)
I can't stop reading her name as Trollberg, the iceberg who sank the Titanic.
Problem?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Your thoughts?
I fully agree and endorse this practice for both sexes. I honestly doesn't get much better than having your ass ate out. :)
Re: (Score:1)
You spelled 'favor' wrong.
erm.. did he/she?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/favour [thefreedictionary.com]
just shows what side of the pond he/she is from and also shows that you are a yank..lol